Do you think the PC/console gap will close in the future?

Dear god you're stupid.

Giovela said

Everything will be 4K so there will be no resolution advantage.

Advantage will be 4K 30-60 vs 4K 60-144hz

Do you see the bolded? "Will" refers to the future, not now. To which I replied resolution on PC will NOT be capped out to 4K as his post implied. They'll still have superior resolution as evidence by 5K being already on the market.

You then replied 5K is worthless chiefly because games struggle to run at 4K in this day and age. How the **** is this relevant when we're speaking of 5K in the context that 4K will be the standard on consoles which is in the future?

So 5K being worthless to you now is irrelevant because we're talking about the future.

Got it or should I slow it down?

Holy crap, talk about meltdown.

Why the heck are you bringing me up to what he said? I never even talked about that quote, all i said was 4k would be the standard and you went way off topic.

You attacked me first, went way off topic, and now are rambling about Giovela which i had nothing to do with that quote.

I simply replied to your 5k monitor statement.

You need to seek help.

Are you legit this slow? You quoted me about 5K, I didn't quote you. I made a statement about 5K in the context of the future and you replied 5K is worthless now completely ignoring the context in which I brought up 5K.

are YOU slow? I acknowledged in the last post I replied to your 5k comment. You are basically repeating what I said.

dude, you really need to read.

PC's are still doing 1080p/1440p 60 fps. That gap hasn't closed at all. By the time the next console releases it will be 30 fps with a high resolution. It's a lot of ground to make up due to the price difference.

Then why the hell did you reply to my 5K comment without acknowledging the context?

It's a forum? I simply added a comment, you attacked me first.

going in circles bud.

Anything beyond 4K is pointless (even 4K on a small screen is pushing it). The greatest advantage of PC gaming is higher frames. 144 fps gaming is a far bigger leap in visual quality than bumping up the resolution.

Lol agreed.

but apparently it’s only ok for a Hermit to say it

How do you know? You have no idea how far streaming technology will evolve in the coming years - and i said years which could be a decade or two. It's ignorant to think that it won't happen considering the current trends.

When you're able to spend thousands on a PC, it will obviously almost always have an advantage over the much cheaper consoles.

But in terms of the graphical fidelity achieved compared to how much it cost to achieve it, I think consoles will almost always win.

You people are funny, 4k is more mainstream on consoles than PCs. Increasing the resolution of screens beyond 4k is is not only a waste of processing but the return on investment is simply terrible.

Yes, with the ever increasing price of GPUs nobody would bother maxing games graphics. Devs will just concentrate on making good console games

No its not, most games on consoles don't run at 4k.

No, and never...

And this won't matter at all, hermits will brag about the powaaaah and in the real world there's a place for consoles no matter how powerful pc can get!!!

Agreed, and I don't really see how some can claim that 4K is such a huge deal over 1080p, or even 1440p in some cases, yet 25-30 fps to 60 fps and beyond is negligible.

I'm sure if there was the same amount of marketing centered around frame rates as there was resolution, the general consensus would change.

So I guess it's isn't just lemmings who are *ahem* lemmings.

You should specify "decade or two" then. Because with the current state of ISP's there is literally no chance of that happening in the next 5-10 years.

Delusional.

That doesn't make sense.

That's like saying hey Mazda RX8 can do 145mph now like the old Ferrari Dino. Consoles can't compete because horse power is directly related to price and for $500 you are not getting the best performance.

Also have you seen the Hz these panels are doing now?... The 1080 Ti is twice as powerful as the X1X and the card that replaces it?... It just won't stop.

By the time the PS5 comes out my PC will be using a 8c/16t Intel i7 and a 3080 Ti with 16GB HBM3... Just no competition.

@SolidGame_basic:

I bought one s brand new for 179€ with 2 games and controller.

Also got ps4 pro + game and controller for 349€ (I can wait months for these sales because its worth the wait to pay 50 less).

also got a budget pc (I got g4560 when it was 60€ but now is 90€ so Id recommned i3 7100 instead)

Case + fans 50€

Hdd 50€

board b350 85€

i3 7100 110€

gtx 1050 ti 170€

2 x 4 gb ddr4 2133mhz ram 90€

mouse keyboard 25€

win 10 kingwin 25€

psu 40€

total: 645€

Consoles are better already if you want just to game and netflix on a super cheap box.

One x is 500€ and is better in gpu and ram compared to this pc build I just mentioned.

Now Id recommend gtx 1060 gb or 6gb instead and i5 (if you cant afford both just get 1060 3gb and the i3 7100.

1060 3gb costs 90€ more than 1050 ti so the total rises to 735€ but its well worth it for 1080p gaming.

If you have a budget of 750 or more go pc all the way.

If you have little to spend get a console on sale/discount and enjoy

Not to mention that the majority of systems out there are regular Ones and PS4s. Xbox One X and PS4 Pro are in the great minority of consoles out in the market.

When 4k becomes a standard, the big difference will be actual graphics again.

Gaurentee it.

The wheel never stops turning, there will always be a gap between consoles and high end PC's.

It'll actually be greater, while they may be able to build farms of servers capable of the highest quality graphics without compromise, streaming limitations (bandwidth, latency etc.) will not allow for the highest quality graphics to be sent to the users. At the same time PC gamers will still be buying and building high end PC's. Think of the bandwidth everyone would need in their house to stream 8K resolution games with all the pretty bells and whistles at 60+ fps.

Games as a service is the future of gaming and streaming will be an integral part of that, especially home consoles. It will take a lot longer to move PC gamers into streaming games though.

I remember a lecturer in college telling me that you would never need more than 128k of RAM because anything more than that is pointless. 30 years from now people will be arguing that you don't need a 32k display in your AR contact lens because any more than 16k is pointless.

Actually, 4K becomes pixel perfect at a distance of about 21" for a 27" display. I don't sit 21" away from my 27" monitor, probably around 15"-20". For a 35" display it's 27" of distance. So anything beyond 5K is starting to show huge diminishing returns but 4K isn't quit there yet.

Source

You can calculate it here.

Yeah, just like anything over 1080p used to be pointless

@MBirdy88: Ah I remember when console gamers use to argue that 720p was just as good as 1080p

At 30 FPS, probably. But it will take longer before a card can run at 60 FPS consistently at 8K on all games, especially since they will be more demanding as time goes on.

8K VR will be achieved as a standard before monitors manage it, and even that will take longer than 5 years.

32K for HMDs is basically retinal resolution, so truly anything more is pointless. You could simulate perfect virtual displays at that resolution too, technically better than real displays.

This guys thinking.

It is depending on viewing distances. It will always depend on viewing distances.

For PC Gamers 1080p was never Enough, the pixel pitch is bad with a 23” monitor from a 2 ft viewing distance.

If a pc Gamers eyes are 2 ft from the screen, ideally they want a 32” 4K Monitor

A 16” 1080p monitor has the same Visual Acuity as a 32” 4K Monitor.

If you put my post in the context of what I was replying to, you'll see I'm not actually predicting future tech but a future discussion around technology advancement. You'll always have people saying we don't need more than we have already.

By the way the human brain and eyes are not digital so saying "we can only perceive X" will always be inaccurate. Digital displays and human eyes combined with the human brain are just not the same thing and are very difficult to compare.

For game enthusiasts, PC will always be the platform of choice, even if you don't game on it or care to admit it. Greater visual fidelity and technical capabilities, a wider range of peripherals, a larger library spread across a greater spectrum of game genres and sub-genres, an open platform so better for development, and a lot kinder to backwards compatibility. To name a few.

Consoles obviously have their perks such as affordability and "plug and play" capability, but the ceiling set by consoles is a lot lower than the one set by PC.

And again, as I read these comments above (and soon, below I imagine), I notice the argument has devolved into a "4K/60 fps" squabble. If that's the only argument consoles can fight for, then yeah, the divide between PC and consoles is quite large because PC has conquered so many other domains in the realm of gaming as a whole, it's not even a fair fight. The sooner console users realize they're in a gilded cage being catered pandered to and told what to like, the sooner they can break free and demand more important things.

Have we ever asked ourselves "why is 4K so damn important?", especially when consoles didn't even get 1080p correct before jumping to the next marketing scheme.

I said years. I mean that could be 100 years.

No, too many console games at 20-30fps.

Which is sad in the year 2018 were in. Our technology is advance in the gaming realm, you would think these hardware developers would make the consoles 60fps right about now.

Not only that, but resolution is also still a issue. People are talking about 4k this and 4k that. but after 5 years of consoles they still can't get a console out that pushes just that resolution stable even on games that are builded for far far weaker machines.

Next generation, either the whole industry focus on 4k resolution, or games will run on those boxes at barely 1080p again.

If the base ps4 and xbox didn't existed, we would be seeing 900p resolutions on the xbox one x.

Because it has games you can't get on non-Nintendo systems? Wow, that was difficult. How stupid are you exactly?

If people didn't care why don't they just go and buy a Wii U for Zelda, hurr durr?

no idea what you’re trying to say lol

No. By the very nature of consoles and gaming PCs, there will always be a gap. Consoles use fixed hardware while PC hardware can be upgraded and is advancing constantly. GPU hardware in particular advances very rapidly.

I’m still waiting on a console that can do 1080p/60fps. When the “gap” is determined by the developer, you can pretty much assume performance will be compromised in the name of graphical fidelity.

60fps on consoles will always be the minority

Very hard to answer. I think its closer, but the modular nature of a PC means a gap will always be there.

Not if the consumer wants consoles to remain within the 400-600 USD range.

Lmao completely irrelevant to OP’s question.

trollolol

Consoles will always be close especially since console games make money and get most of the development.

Getting the PC version of games because they are slightly better looking is not worth it for most people.

But they never were

I think they will merge eventually. Compared to the early 90's when most consoles games consisted of side-scrollers and top down-view, there are many games nowadays that are common to both.

Personally, it might accelerate further if consoles added keyboard and mouse support. I always wanted to move my multiplatform gaming to consoles and keep the PC for the PC-centric genres (flight sims, strategy/wargames).

@MonsieurX said:@stuff238 said: Consoles will always be close especially since console games make money and get most of the development.

Getting the PC version of games because they are slightly better looking is not worth it for most people.

But they never were

360’s Xenos GPU was Incredible at launch. Likely equal to a X1900 XT in capability. And the X1900XT was months from releasing and $550

The Xenos was based on ATi's upcoming X1000 series R520 architecture that came out in late 2005 same time frame as the 360. The thing that made the Xenos ahead of the curve in 2005 was the fact it was unified shader based allowing a slew of different ratios of the shader processors to work on different types of workloads not limited a set amount of processors for one type of work. But it was not equal to x1800xt nor x1900xt. X1800xt had 9.600 GPixel/s rate vs the Xeno's 4.0. And x1800xt had a texture rate of 9.6 GTexel/s vs Xeno's 8.0. and x1800xt had nearly 2x the memory bandwidth as well. 1900xt could do 10 GPixel/s and 10 GTexel/s rate...

Yes, it will disappear completely.

PC gamers are using more and more gaming laptops, instead of building their own super PCs. And gaming laptop is basically the same as a console, an unmodifiable piece of tech.

This trend will continue, and so, in five years or so, there is no longer any gap between PS5, scorpio, and the gaming laptops of that time.

Note also that as less and less people build their own PC's, the sales of individual components will go down drastically. Many companies will stop selling video cards and CPUs to consumers due to this, and will concentrate on building and selling gaming laptops and other pre build systems.

This will happen. PC gaming will shift completely to pre build gaming systems. Fact.